On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 10:09 PM Andrii Nakryiko
<andrii.nakryiko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 3:22 PM Hao Luo <haoluo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > We have introduced a new type to make bpf_reg composable, by
> > allocating bits in the type to represent flags.
> >
> > One of the flags is PTR_MAYBE_NULL which indicates a pointer
> > may be NULL. This patch switches the qualified reg_types to
> > use this flag. The reg_types changed in this patch include:
> >
> > 1. PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_OR_NULL
> > 2. PTR_TO_SOCKET_OR_NULL
> > 3. PTR_TO_SOCK_COMMON_OR_NULL
> > 4. PTR_TO_TCP_SOCK_OR_NULL
> > 5. PTR_TO_BTF_ID_OR_NULL
> > 6. PTR_TO_MEM_OR_NULL
> > 7. PTR_TO_RDONLY_BUF_OR_NULL
> > 8. PTR_TO_RDWR_BUF_OR_NULL
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Hao Luo <haoluo@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/net/ethernet/netronome/nfp/bpf/fw.h | 4 +-
> > include/linux/bpf.h | 16 +-
> > kernel/bpf/btf.c | 7 +-
> > kernel/bpf/map_iter.c | 4 +-
> > kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 278 ++++++++------------
> > net/core/bpf_sk_storage.c | 2 +-
> > net/core/sock_map.c | 2 +-
> > 7 files changed, 126 insertions(+), 187 deletions(-)
> >
>
> [...]
>
> > @@ -535,38 +520,35 @@ static bool is_cmpxchg_insn(const struct bpf_insn *insn)
> > }
> >
> > /* string representation of 'enum bpf_reg_type' */
> > -static const char * const reg_type_str[] = {
> > - [NOT_INIT] = "?",
> > - [SCALAR_VALUE] = "inv",
> > - [PTR_TO_CTX] = "ctx",
> > - [CONST_PTR_TO_MAP] = "map_ptr",
> > - [PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE] = "map_value",
> > - [PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_OR_NULL] = "map_value_or_null",
> > - [PTR_TO_STACK] = "fp",
> > - [PTR_TO_PACKET] = "pkt",
> > - [PTR_TO_PACKET_META] = "pkt_meta",
> > - [PTR_TO_PACKET_END] = "pkt_end",
> > - [PTR_TO_FLOW_KEYS] = "flow_keys",
> > - [PTR_TO_SOCKET] = "sock",
> > - [PTR_TO_SOCKET_OR_NULL] = "sock_or_null",
> > - [PTR_TO_SOCK_COMMON] = "sock_common",
> > - [PTR_TO_SOCK_COMMON_OR_NULL] = "sock_common_or_null",
> > - [PTR_TO_TCP_SOCK] = "tcp_sock",
> > - [PTR_TO_TCP_SOCK_OR_NULL] = "tcp_sock_or_null",
> > - [PTR_TO_TP_BUFFER] = "tp_buffer",
> > - [PTR_TO_XDP_SOCK] = "xdp_sock",
> > - [PTR_TO_BTF_ID] = "ptr_",
> > - [PTR_TO_BTF_ID_OR_NULL] = "ptr_or_null_",
> > - [PTR_TO_PERCPU_BTF_ID] = "percpu_ptr_",
> > - [PTR_TO_MEM] = "mem",
> > - [PTR_TO_MEM_OR_NULL] = "mem_or_null",
> > - [PTR_TO_RDONLY_BUF] = "rdonly_buf",
> > - [PTR_TO_RDONLY_BUF_OR_NULL] = "rdonly_buf_or_null",
> > - [PTR_TO_RDWR_BUF] = "rdwr_buf",
> > - [PTR_TO_RDWR_BUF_OR_NULL] = "rdwr_buf_or_null",
> > - [PTR_TO_FUNC] = "func",
> > - [PTR_TO_MAP_KEY] = "map_key",
> > -};
> > +static const char *reg_type_str(enum bpf_reg_type type)
> > +{
> > + static const char * const str[] = {
> > + [NOT_INIT] = "?",
> > + [SCALAR_VALUE] = "inv",
> > + [PTR_TO_CTX] = "ctx",
> > + [CONST_PTR_TO_MAP] = "map_ptr",
> > + [PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE] = "map_value",
> > + [PTR_TO_STACK] = "fp",
> > + [PTR_TO_PACKET] = "pkt",
> > + [PTR_TO_PACKET_META] = "pkt_meta",
> > + [PTR_TO_PACKET_END] = "pkt_end",
> > + [PTR_TO_FLOW_KEYS] = "flow_keys",
> > + [PTR_TO_SOCKET] = "sock",
> > + [PTR_TO_SOCK_COMMON] = "sock_common",
> > + [PTR_TO_TCP_SOCK] = "tcp_sock",
> > + [PTR_TO_TP_BUFFER] = "tp_buffer",
> > + [PTR_TO_XDP_SOCK] = "xdp_sock",
> > + [PTR_TO_BTF_ID] = "ptr_",
> > + [PTR_TO_PERCPU_BTF_ID] = "percpu_ptr_",
> > + [PTR_TO_MEM] = "mem",
> > + [PTR_TO_RDONLY_BUF] = "rdonly_buf",
> > + [PTR_TO_RDWR_BUF] = "rdwr_buf",
> > + [PTR_TO_FUNC] = "func",
> > + [PTR_TO_MAP_KEY] = "map_key",
> > + };
> > +
> > + return str[base_type(type)];
>
> well... now we lose the "_or_null" part, that can be pretty important.
> Same will happen with RDONLY flag, right?
>
> What can we do about that?
>
We can format the string into a global buffer and return the buffer to
the caller. A little overhead on string formatting.
I assume there is already synchronization around the verifier to
prevent race on the buffer. If not, we have to ask the caller of
reg_type_str() to pass in a buffer.
> > +}
> >
> > static char slot_type_char[] = {
> > [STACK_INVALID] = '?',
> > @@ -631,7 +613,7 @@ static void print_verifier_state(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
> > continue;
> > verbose(env, " R%d", i);
> > print_liveness(env, reg->live);
> > - verbose(env, "=%s", reg_type_str[t]);
> > + verbose(env, "=%s", reg_type_str(t));
> > if (t == SCALAR_VALUE && reg->precise)
> > verbose(env, "P");
> > if ((t == SCALAR_VALUE || t == PTR_TO_STACK) &&
>
> [...]
>
> > if (smin >= BPF_MAX_VAR_OFF || smin <= -BPF_MAX_VAR_OFF) {
> > verbose(env, "value %lld makes %s pointer be out of bounds\n",
> > - smin, reg_type_str[type]);
> > + smin, reg_type_str(type));
> > return false;
> > }
> >
> > @@ -7209,11 +7151,13 @@ static int adjust_ptr_min_max_vals(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
> > return -EACCES;
> > }
> >
> > - switch (ptr_reg->type) {
> > - case PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_OR_NULL:
> > + if (ptr_reg->type == PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_OR_NULL) {
> > verbose(env, "R%d pointer arithmetic on %s prohibited, null-check it first\n",
>
> the same message can be output for other pointer types, so instead of
> special-casing, let's just combine them with more helpful message
>
Ok. Just want to confirm my understanding, do you mean checking for
NULL? Like the following replacement:
- if (ptr_reg->type == PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_OR_NULL) {
+ if (ptr_reg->type & PTR_MAYBE_NULL) {
> > - dst, reg_type_str[ptr_reg->type]);
> > + dst, reg_type_str(ptr_reg->type));
> > return -EACCES;
> > + }
> > +
> > + switch (base_type(ptr_reg->type)) {
> > case CONST_PTR_TO_MAP:
> > /* smin_val represents the known value */
> > if (known && smin_val == 0 && opcode == BPF_ADD)
> > @@ -7221,14 +7165,11 @@ static int adjust_ptr_min_max_vals(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
> > fallthrough;
> > case PTR_TO_PACKET_END:
> > case PTR_TO_SOCKET:
> > - case PTR_TO_SOCKET_OR_NULL:
> > case PTR_TO_SOCK_COMMON:
> > - case PTR_TO_SOCK_COMMON_OR_NULL:
> > case PTR_TO_TCP_SOCK:
> > - case PTR_TO_TCP_SOCK_OR_NULL:
> > case PTR_TO_XDP_SOCK:
> > verbose(env, "R%d pointer arithmetic on %s prohibited\n",
> > - dst, reg_type_str[ptr_reg->type]);
> > + dst, reg_type_str(ptr_reg->type));
> > return -EACCES;
> > default:
> > break;
>
> [...]
